You'all have one weird system

[kootenay]

Only in the land of Known known's known unknowns and unknown unknowns could a public process be so ^&*(ed up.

Pentagon bars Canadian journalists from Guantanamo Bay - The Globe and Mail

he Globe and Mail is appealing a Pentagon decision to ban reporter Paul Koring from Guantanamo Bay after he was accused of violating the rules of the military tribunals.

“Your reporters published the name of a witness whose identity was protected in court,” the Pentagon wrote to The Globe and Mail and three other media organizations, whose reporters were also banned. “As a result of these violations, these individual reporters are barred from returning to cover future military commissions proceedings.”

The Globe’s editor-in-chief, John Stackhouse, disputed the decision against the paper’s Washington-based international affairs correspondent. “We strongly disagree with the Pentagon's interpretation of its own rules, and intend to fight the ban as a matter of Canadian public interest in these hearings,” he said. “The name in question was a matter of public record. Banning the information now – when it is already known around the world – serves no apparent purpose other than to raise more questions about the credibility of the Guantanamo courts.”

[Sailormon6]

Mebbe so, but they're remedying the f-up by banning the pompous sob's who don't want to play by the court's rules. When a court orders that a witness's identity be withheld for his protection, any reporter who ignores the rule ought to be banished. If they don't like it, they can sue the government. That's more of a remedy than the witness has, who has had a target painted on his back.

[ssneade]

Originally Posted by Sailormon6

Mebbe so, but they're remedying the f-up by banning the pompous sob's who don't want to play by the court's rules. When a court orders that a witness's identity be withheld for his protection, any reporter who ignores the rule ought to be banished. If they don't like it, they can sue the government. That's more of a remedy than the witness has, who has had a target painted on his back.

he f-ed up and he wants to sue the government? definitely a case where a "loser pays" law should be in effect. although a lot of money would be saved if we just painted a target on all gitmo detainees backs........

sorry, people who want to kill americans don't deserve due process.....

[2Gringos]

Not sure just what business it is of some Canadian what the US military is doing with US prisoners on a US base.

Send him back to Canada to report on the worlds largest beaver dam.

That's his business. Not Gitmo.

He doesnt like it? tough poop.

[ssneade]

Originally Posted by 2Gringos

Not sure just what business it is of some Canadian what the US military is doing with US prisoners on a US base.

Send him back to Canada to report on the worlds largest beaver dam.

That's his business. Not Gitmo.

He doesnt like it? tough poop.

hey, you can see that thing from space. don't they have a magazine entitled "the beaver"? damn..........

ought to be some pretty interesting stories in there........

[kootenay]

The prisoner is an underage Canadian citizen (16 when captured) thats the interest that Canadians have in the case and a valid one too. Now the dumb thing is the witness's name was already in the press world wide. Thats like saying that Dick Cheney was VP but its a secret now so dont report it. Thats the dumb part.

As to due process? Does that mean that we should not afford due process to Americans charged in Canada? We should just throw you in jail and restrict your access to council and the legal process. We afford due process to everyone most especially those charged of the most serious crimes. The issue regarding Gitmo is that it is the US is violating a basic moral underpining of your society in what it is doing. And in doing so is actually giving a major propaganda victory, aid and comfort to the enemy if you will, to the terrorists. Another dumb part.

[WanderingStar]

Well then, vote against it in the next election.

[2Gringos]

I didn't say the Canadians didn't have an interest in it. I said it was none of their business. They don't want to abide by the rules, screw em.

and for the Canadians to decide they are going to start dictating how the US treats criminal terrorists...I say again...screw em.

[Sailormon6]

Originally Posted by kootenay

The prisoner is an underage Canadian citizen (16 when captured) thats the interest that Canadians have in the case and a valid one too. Now the dumb thing is the witness's name was already in the press world wide. Thats like saying that Dick Cheney was VP but its a secret now so dont report it. Thats the dumb part.

The fact that the whole world knows his name is a very different thing from the whole world knowing that he testified as a witness in a criminal prosecution of a terrorist. That's what puts a target on his back, and shame on your reporters for doing it.

As to due process? Does that mean that we should not afford due process to Americans charged in Canada? We should just throw you in jail and restrict your access to council and the legal process. We afford due process to everyone most especially those charged of the most serious crimes. The issue regarding Gitmo is that it is the US is violating a basic moral underpining of your society in what it is doing. And in doing so is actually giving a major propaganda victory, aid and comfort to the enemy if you will, to the terrorists. Another dumb part.

The Gitmo terrorists are being accorded access to counsel. They are being accorded Due Process of Law under the oversight of the US Supreme Court, which has set the "Gold Standard" for the world in such concerns.

The US has regulated the terrorists' access to counsel due to the actions of Julia Tarver Mason and other lawyers who represented several accused terrorists, and who aided and abetted them in their crimes, and who endangered the lives of the men and women at Gitmo who had to guard the terrorists. The military didn't just decide, on it's own, to limit access to counsel. It went to court and proved the treachery that was being committed by the lawyers, and the danger that it caused, and the court authorized the limitations as reasonable and necessary under the dangerous conditions that prevailed, and the court deemed the limitations reasonable and proper for the security of Gitmo and the safety of its personnel. Read about it here.

Debra Burlingame and Thomas Joscelyn: Gitmo's Indefensible Lawyers - WSJ.com

But, the world is full of liberal sidewalk supervisors, who think they're smarter than our military and our high courts, and they know better what should be published than our courts. They have the luxury of disagreeing with our military and judicial officials, and of ridiculing them on the basis of half-truths, because they don't have to personally shoulder the responsibility for the safety of our troops.

You don't have to worry about your little juvie terrorist. Based on this country's long tradition of compassion for young criminals, I'm confident he'll get fairer treatment than he deserves.

[ssneade]

Originally Posted by Sailormon6

The fact that the whole world knows his name is a very different thing from the whole world knowing that he testified as a witness in a criminal prosecution of a terrorist. That's what puts a target on his back, and shame on your reporters for doing it.


The Gitmo terrorists are being accorded access to counsel. They are being accorded Due Process of Law under the oversight of the US Supreme Court, which has set the "Gold Standard" for the world in such concerns.

The US has regulated the terrorists' access to counsel due to the actions of Julia Tarver Mason and other lawyers who represented several accused terrorists, and who aided and abetted them in their crimes, and who endangered the lives of the men and women at Gitmo who had to guard the terrorists. The military didn't just decide, on it's own, to limit access to counsel. It went to court and proved the treachery that was being committed by the lawyers, and the danger that it caused, and the court authorized the limitations as reasonable and necessary under the dangerous conditions that prevailed, and the court deemed the limitations reasonable and proper for the security of Gitmo and the safety of its personnel. Read about it here.

Debra Burlingame and Thomas Joscelyn: Gitmo's Indefensible Lawyers - WSJ.com

But, the world is full of liberal sidewalk supervisors, who think they're smarter than our military and our high courts, and they know better what should be published than our courts. They have the luxury of disagreeing with our military and judicial officials, and of ridiculing them on the basis of half-truths, because they don't have to personally shoulder the responsibility for the safety of our troops.

You don't have to worry about your little juvie terrorist. Based on this country's long tradition of compassion for young criminals, I'm confident he'll get fairer treatment than he deserves.

maybe they've taught him to be a professional soap dropper..........